MagnusP
It's absolutely correct that this man should not have been flying while inebriated. However, what surprises me is the apparent incapacitation of an individual whose reported blood alcohol level wasn't significantly higher than that considered legal while driving. As a (presumably non-recovering) alcoholic, his system should have had a fair level of alcohol tolerance and, while unfit to fly, I'd have thought most symptoms would be well-masked. Inability to name destination? There's something else going on here.
Sorry if someone has replied before to your question, MagnusP, I havenīt got time now to finish reading the thread.
I must say I havenīt got any medical knowledge or clinical background.
If you have been closed to someone suffering from alcoholism, you may find out that an alcoholic is not necessarily the same as a heavy drinker. A heavy drinker may not be an alcoholic, and they usually develop a tolerance, I guess, by which they need higher quantities of alcohol to have an effect on them. But I have witnessed thousands of times how just a few sips of beer can drastically get an alcoholic drunk. You may not notice unless you are familiar with the person. I have witnessed many times how, sometimes even the act of opening a bottle changes the state of mind of an alcoholic.
And bear in mind that the withdrawal syndrome of alcoholism is horrible. Some say itīs even worse than that of opiates, like heroin. DT is not uncommon. An untreated alcoholic ALWAYS needs a drink, no matter the situation, itīs just a matter of how long ago their last drink was.
It may not be the general case, I am only talking about a personal experience, but if the person is an untreated alcoholic, I donīt think they should be abe to fly, drive a train or perform any critical job. Just half glass of wine can change an alcoholic from Dr jeckill into Mr Hyde.
Then again, there may be degrees, I repeat I am no expert and I am only talking about the one case I know, and other 2-3 cases associated with this person.
Regards,